Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No.

5, December 2015 Part II

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Asia Pacific Journal of

The Construct of Extension from the Multidisciplinary Research
University Faculty Perspective Vol. 3 No.5, 1-11
December 2015 Part II
Juvy G. Mojares P-ISSN 2350-7756
Batangas State University-Malvar Campus, Batangas, Philippines E-ISSN 2350-8442
mojuvs@gmail.com www.apjmr.com

Date Received: November 11, 2015; Date Revised: December 31, 2015

Abstract – This study aimed to determine the construct of extension from the university faculty
perspective and the relationship between demographic profile and extension involvement. Twenty-eight
faculty members were purposively selected with considerations such as employment status (contractual,
temporary and permanent), at least four years in service, and present on that day of distribution of
questionnaire forms. Both descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS program and Wordle
application were used to analyze data. Results showed that 58% of the respondents are female; 54% are
contractual; 1-10 years in service; 1-5 years in doing extension with 1-5 extension involvement commonly
gift-giving and clean- up drive; gender is related to extension involvement; there is a substantial positive
relationship between employment status and extension involvement; only 41% of the variance in
extension involvement can be attributed to the combined effect of years in service and years in doing
extension; nature of extension is service; the purpose of extension is formative; and the level of
engagement is already engaged. Based on the obtained results, the study concluded that there are more
female contractual faculty members involved in extension activities; gender, employment status, years in
service and years in doing extension are related to number of extension involvement of faculty members;
the construct of extension is perceived as HEIs’ function to help the needs and in the development of the
community since extension is still on the nature of service with formative purpose. Yet, they agree that
university extension is already engaged.

Keywords –extension, nature, purpose and level of engagement of extension, university extension

INTRODUCTION The aim of extension is to help people through

The concept of extension is open to a wide variety
of interpretations because it is evolving as a result of
tradition and policy context which is reflective of
institutional goals. The term extension presages
various understanding and it means different things in
different places [1]. For example, for the Dutch,
extension is voorlichting which means lighting the
path, for the French, it is vulgarisation which means
simplifying message, and for the Spanish, extension is
capacitacion which refers to training. As Baker [2]
puts, it is the transfer and spread of technology and
technical information or know-how from information
sources or developers through those who
communicate it to those who receive it. Its definition
varies considerably from knowledge and technology
transfer from universities to enterprises, to a broader
concept to serve community needs in urban planning,
health services, legal advice or topics of environment
or energy [3]. Therefore, extension is a dynamic
concept.
1
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
education to recognize their own problems and work
out their solutions [4]. Known extension efforts
emerged as a step to help farm people adjust to
societal condition and needs. Roling[5] conversely
states that extension is not a special pedagogy of
agriculture. It can be successfully used by different
types of organizations to reach different groups of
people with different messages [6] like the University
of Nebraska’s urban outreach programs [7].
From then on, different higher education
institutions (HEIs) recognized extension as one of the
three major functions. Aniedi and Effiom [8] assert
“Universities all over the world are mandated to
perform three core functions consisting of teaching,
research and extension.From the traditionally serving
communities Magrath [9] proposed that the
21stcentury university adopts one general mission:
service to the public, supported by teaching, learning,
and new research discoveries. In addition, multiversity
unveils a new vision of scholarship that generally
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
pursues the threefold mission of teaching, research,
and public service [10], [11]. Preece [12]mentioned
that after the long journey of educational revolution,
universities have supported three strands to their
mission: research, teaching and community service. It
can be argued that the third mission is the potential
bridge between the university as an ivory tower and
the communities whose development needs it should
be prioritizing. Likewise, Preece [13] reiterated that
the third mission of universities – community service
– provides the space toaddress such a challenge in a
way that can refocus its research and teachingmissions
to transform and revitalize the relationship between
higher educationand national development
needs.Thus, there is a need to stimulate the linkages
among teaching, research and extension; as the
relationship between higher education and society is
generally understood as the “third mission” that is
extension [3].
In the Philippines, RA 8435, an act prescribing
urgent related measures to modernize the agriculture
and fisheries sectors of the country, stated that
extension program of state colleges and universities
shall primarily focus on the improvement of the
capability of the local government unit (LGU)
extension service by providing: a) degree and non-
degree training programs; b) technical assistance; c)
extension cum research activities; d) monitoring and
evaluation of LGU extension projects; and e)
information support services through the tri-media and
electronics [14]. Therefore, extension advocacy is
particularly expressed as a function of state
universities and colleges (SUCs) to assist the local
government units in improving their effectiveness
through capability-building and complementary
extension services [15]. An example of this is the
Agro-Industrial Development Program, UPLBCA
(University of the Philippines Los Banos College of
Agriculture), aimed to operationalize partnerships
within agricultural communities for the effective and
efficient delivery of agricultural extension services. It
involves the binding of the different levels of LGUs,
local SUCs and other stakeholders through activities
such as participatory planning, institutionalization of
monitoring and evaluation systems, resource
mobilization, and institution building and
strengthening[16].
Likewise, Commission on Higher Education
(CHED) has defined extension as the act of
communicating, persuading and helping specific
2
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
sectors and target clienteles to enable them to
effectively improve production, community and/or
institutions, and quality of life [17]. CHED, in its
involvement in agriculture development, awards
outstanding extension programs from different HEIs
in the country. This is the first nationwide recognition
program for extension. It aims to recognize the HEIs
and implementers for their outstanding extension
programs; encourage conduct of extension work that
is relevant and responsive to the needs of the
community and society; and promote appreciation of
the importance of the extension function of HEIs [18].
Batangas State University (BatStateU) is one of the
HEIs in Batangas. BatStateU-Malvar was created on
March 21, 2001 through RA 9045[19], integrating
Jose P. Laurel Polytechnic College as one of the
autonomous campuses of BatStateU. From then on,
BatStateU is committed to implement its mandates by
translating corporate values in instruction, research,
extension and production towards the making of the
Filipino.
However, as one of the thrusts mandated by
CHED, extension is least emphasized among the core
functions may be due to the absence of a clear and
common mandate for extension of HEIs [20].In
addition, Alcala [21] claimed that the concept of
academic extension is misunderstood by many
universities in the country.Extension as the third
mission receives lower status than the other two
missions [13]. Because of this, HEIs in the country
like Batangas State University (BatStateU), view
extension in different ways with the most common
form as dole out assistance to communities struck by
calamities and other community outreach activities
like coastal clean-up, blood-letting, and tree planting.
These various views on extension imply that extension
as a function of HEIs is not well-infused into the
consciousness of the entire institution as Lero [20]
claimed. In addition, university community
engagement through service learning fails to impact
oncommunity change because insufficient attention is
paid to genuineengagement (listening to the
community; enhancing local resources,critiquing
power relations, reciprocity) [22].
This further leads to the confusion as regards what
extension should be and how extension ought to be
performed. The gap appears to be between what is
currently being practiced in HEIs and the true
meaning of extension which is participatory in nature
as popularized by Robert Chambers [23].
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On the other hand, there is limited published
literature on HEIs’ extension in the Philippines; yet
foreign literature is abundant. The study of [24]
explored on the extent of extension services delivery
among all faculty members and extension staff who
were serving the teacher education programs of
selected state technological institutions in Region
VIII. It also determined the relationships between
profile characteristics of the extension service
program implementers in terms of age, educational
attainment, length of service, relevant trainings and
attitude towards extension service. For foreign
literature, Berrio [25] described the dominant culture
of Ohio State University Extension (OSUE) using
demographic characteristics of job title, major
program area, sex, age, and length of employment[26]
also described the extent of information use by
Extension agents in the United States and found
significant differences between demographic
characteristics (age, gender, education level, and
primary are of program responsibility) and
information sources used [27] assessed training needs
of Extension agents relative to program evaluation and
accountability and found out that majority of the
respondents were male, averaged 16 years of work
experience and family living/home economics as the
primary area of program responsibility.
Thus, this study aimed to be added as it determined
the construct of extension from the lens of BatStateU-
Malvar faculty members. In order to do this,
demographic profile in terms of gender, employment
status, years in service and years in doing extension
and its relationship to extension involvement were
described.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
With this context, this study aimed to determine the
construct of extension based on nature, purpose, level
of engagement and definition from the university
faculty perspective. Specifically, it determined the
demographic profile (gender, employment status,
years in service and years in doing extension) of the
university faculty members and its relationship to
extension involvement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The total population of faculty members in the
campus was 96 and 30% or 28 of it was considered as
the sample size. For the purpose of this study, 28
faculty members of Batangas State University Malvar
3
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
Campus were purposively selected with
considerations such as at least four years in service,
and present on the day of distribution of questionnaire.
Demographic profile in terms of gender, employment
status, years in service and years in doing extension
was determined. Number and list of extension
involvement were also identified. Of the 28
questionnaires, one was lost; three were not retrieved
on the assigned date of collection despite effort of
reminding and making follow-ups.Returned
questionnaires were tallied and tabulated.
The standardized questionnaires had three parts:
Nature of Extension, Purpose of Extension, and Level
of Engagement. Nature of Extension refers to the
overall characteristic and type of extension as
practiced among higher education institutions in the
Philippines. Gaffikin and Morrissey’s [28] typologies
refer to Ivory Tower (The institution is detached; no
community involvement at all.); Non-partisan (There
is involvement but the institution is cautious
especially in divided communities to avoid
accusations of bias.); Service (The program of service
is seen as a limited and irregular involvement of the
institution, only when a need occurs.); Outreach(A
more regular and organized program of service to the
community than the service type.); and Engaged
(There is a formal form of partnership/collaboration
between the institution and the community). Nature of
Extension portion has five rows representing the five
types. Using Likert Scale of five, respondents were
asked to check (√) the column that corresponds to
their answer. Weighted Mean is employed in this
question using the following scale:
5 - Strongly Agree 4.2-5.0-Engaged
4 – Agree 3.4-4.19-Outreach
3-Disagree 2.6-3.39-Service
2-Strongly Disagree 1.8-2.59-Non-Partisan
1-Undecided 1.0-1.79-Ivory Tower
Purpose of Extension is the aim of extension
program described as Informative (Providing
information to enable people make informed
decisions.); Persuasive (Securing people’s support to
certain programs, policies that protect public interests
and achieve societal goals.); Formative (Enhancing
the capabilities of the people to solve problems.); and
Emancipatory (Engaging stakeholders to better
understand their situations and come up with creative
solutions to address concerns). Purpose of Extension
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
portion has four rows representing the four types.
Using Likert Scale of five, respondents were asked to
check (√) the column that corresponds to their answer.
Weighted Mean is employed in this question using the
scale:
5-Strongly Agree 4.0-5.0-Emancipatory
4-Agree 3.0-3.99-Formative
3-Disagree 2.0-2.99-Persuasive
2-Strongly Disagree 1.0-1.99-Informative
1-Undecided
Level of Engagement refers to the seven guiding
characteristicsthat defined an engaged institution,
which constitute almost a seven-part test of
engagement [29]. They are responsiveness (Listening
to the communities, asking the right questions and
offering services in the right way at the right time.);
respect for partners (A joint academic-community
definitions of problems, solutions and success; a
recognition that the institution has much to learn – not
only to offer - in the process.); academic neutrality
(The university maintains the role of neutral facilitator
and source of information when public policy issues,
particularly contentious ones, are at stake.);
accessibility (What the institution can offer is readily
available to help inexperienced potential partners.);
integration (Engagement offers new opportunities for
integrating institutional scholarship with the service
and teaching missions of the university.); coordination
(A result of integration, coordination involves
“making sure that left hand knows what the right hand
is doing.”), and resource partnership (This involves
sourcing of funds and strong partnerships especially
with the government, business and the non-profit
organizations.)Level of Engagement portion has 23
rows representing the seven levels. Using Likert Scale
of five, respondents were asked to check (√) the
column that corresponds to their answer for each
statement. Weighted Mean is employed in this
question using the following scale:
4.2- 5.0 - Strongly Agree
3.4- 4.19 - Agree
2.6- 3.39 - Disagree
1.8- 2.59 - Strongly Disagree
1.0- 1.79 - Undecided
Following the steps in SPSS, different statistical
techniques were employed. For the descriptive,
weighted mean was used to determine the type,
purpose and level of engagement in extension. To
determine the relationship between a dichotomous
variable (gender) and an interval variable (number of
4
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
extension involvement), the best correlation analysis
used was Point biserial coefficient (rpb). It is the
coefficient describing the relationship between one
interval and one dichotomous variable. To determine
the relationship between employment status and
number of extension involvement of faculty
extensionists, there was a need for a different type of
statistic to calculate the correlation between these two
variables that used ranked data. In this case, the
Spearman rho, a specialized form of the Pearson r,
was appropriate.
For the respondents’ response on the open-ended
question about the list of extension involvement and
own definition of extension, Wordle application was
used. Wordle is a web application tool readily
available in the net. It is used in analysis of inputted
words, phrases or even a whole article by determining
the most dominant words presented in a number of
templates to choose from.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Table 1. Distribution of Respondents according to
Gender
Gender f %
Male 10 58
Female 14 42
Total 24 100
It is shown on the table that 58% of the
respondents are female. This is expected since there
are really more females in BatStateU- Malvar
Campus. In fact, out of the 96 members of the
professoriate, 58 are female. This is also true not just
in other local HEIs but also in Ohio State University
Extension wherein there is 198 female compared to 96
male [25].Female agents communicated more
frequently than male agents with other community
organizations [26].
Table 2. Distribution of Respondents according to
Employment
Employment Status Frequency Percentage
Contractual 13 54
Temporary 2 9
Permanent 9 37
Total 24 100
Table2 shows that majority (54%) of the
respondents are contractual. Thisis also expected since
of the 96 full time faculty members, 73 is contractual,
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

seven(7) is temporary and only 17 permanent with years a faculty member may have one extension
plantilla position. This limited number of permanent involvement. This is true as explained by [30]that
teaching position may imply lack of extension there is a lack of time on the part of some designated
personnel as supported by Prakongsri [30] and Lero extension staff members to perform extension
[20] saying that there is lack of full time extension function because of preoccupation with their teaching
personnel in universities in Thailand and in the assignment, and lack of full-time extension personnel.
Philippines.
Table 5. Number of Extension Involvement
Table 3. Distribution of Respondents according to Number of Extension Involvement f %
Years in Service 1-5 19 79
Years in Service f % 6-10 3 13
4-14 18 75 11-15 2 8
15-24 2 8 Total 24 100
25-34 4 17 Table 5 is in consonance with years in doing
Total 24 100 extension. This is an implication that majority of
It can be gleaned from Table 3 that 75% of the university personnel favor instruction and so a great
respondents are 4-14 years in the university. This majority lack the willingness and commitment to
means that they are already adjusted to the engage in extension[30].
environment and are informed of the four mandates To determine the most common extension activity
of CHED as stipulated in the Contract of of the respondents based on their list extension
Employment. This is supported by [26]which found involvement, the following figure was derived.
out that extension agents averaged 13 years of work Figure 1 shows that the most common extension
experience. involvement of the respondents is coastal clean-up
initiated through National Service Training Program
Table 4. Distribution of Respondents according to
(NSTP) class and gift giving organized by faculty
Years in doing Extension
members and students in each college during
Years in doing Extension f % Christmas season in communities struck by disasters
1-5 17 70
and/or dwelled by indigent families. This is supported
6-10 6 26
11-15 1 4 by Lero [20]who found out that a number of HEIs in
Total 24 100 the Philippines still continue giving material goods
Table 4 shows that 70% of the respondents have 1- (dole-outs) including BatStateU-Malvar.
5 years of doing extension. This means that within 4

Figure 1. WORDLE result for the respondents’ extension involvement

5
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
 Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015 Part II
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

B. Demographic Profile and its Relation to decision is to reject Ho since p value (.041) is less than
Extension alpha value (.05). This means a substantial positive
relationship between employment status and extension
1. Gender and Extension Involvement involvement.
When gender is correlated to number of extension
involvement,point biserial coefficient is employed Table 9. p (significance) value (Correlations)
using the SPSS program. Computing for the value of Extension Employment
Involvement status
rpb,using the mean from Table6 and the standard Extension Pearson Correlation 1 .420*
deviation from Table 7, the value of rpbis .42 which involvement Sig. (2-taled) .041
means a moderate positive relationship between N 24 24
gender and number of extension involvement (Female Employment Pearson Correlation .420* 1
faculty members will likely have more extension status Sig. (2-taled) .041
N 24 24
involvement) while the t value is 2.58. With the
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
decision rule of rejecting Ho (Gender is not related to
number of extension involvement) if obtained t value
2. Years in Service and years in doing Extension and
is greater than the tabular t value.Given tabular t value
Extension Involvement
of 1.717 from df 22 at .05, female faculty members
have more extension involvement and is, indeed, true
Using Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) to
to all the population from which the sample is drawn.
determine the strength of relationship between the
three variables (Table 10), with the regression
Table 6. Computed Mp and Mq(Group Statistics)
equation of y= .033 + .086x + .682x, it is expected
N Mean SD Std. Error
gender that number of extension involvement to increase by
Mean
number of
male 10 6.1000 4.55705 1.44106
.086 for additional year in service. Likewise, it is also
extension female 14 3.0714 2.05555 .54937 expected for extension involvement to increase by
involvement .682 for additional year in doing extension. Based on
Table 11, computed R (.642) is substantial positive
Table 7. Computed Standard Deviation of Number of significance, with R2 (.41) which means that only 41%
Extension Involvement Descriptive Statistics (N=24) of the variance in extension involvement can be
Std.
Minimum Maximum Mean
Deviation
attributed to the combined effect of years in service
number of and years in doing extension. Adjusted R2 (.356)
4.333
extension .00 15.00
3
3.58338 means that only 36% of the variance is explained by
involvement years in service and years in doing extension. Still,
64% can be explained by other variables.
2. Employment Status and Extension Involvement Tacbas, de Vera, &Romo[31] investigated the
effectiveness of the extension programs of University
Table 8. Spearman rho value (Correlations) of Northern Philippines (UNP) from 2005-2008. They
Extension Employment revealed that extent of implementation of the
Involvement status Extension office programs was significantly related to
Extension Sig. (2-tailed) 1.000 .530**
involvement . .008
administrative capability in terms of leadership,
Employment Sig. (2-tailed) 530** personnel and staff.
status .008 1.000 In addition, [24]found out that years in service is
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01level (2-tailed). significantly related to the implementation of
extension service programs and not significantly
When employment status is correlated to related to the adequacy of resources as perceived by
extension involvement, Spearman rho is employed all faculty members and extension staff who were
using the SPSS program. Table 8 shows the computed serving the teacher education programs of the selected
Spearman rho value of .530 while Table 9 shows the state technological institutions in Region VIII.
value of significance at .041. With the decision rule of
rejecting Ho if p value is lesser than alpha at .05, the

6
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 10. Coefficient values of the independent variables (Coefficientsa)

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig
1 (Constant) 0.033 1.281 0.025 0.980
years in service 0.086 0.067 0.221 1.294 0.210
years in doing extension 0.682 0.207 0.562 3.297 0.003
a. Dependent Variable: number of Extension involvement

Table 11. Variances (Model Summary)

Change Statistics
Std. Error
Adjusted of the R Square F Sig. F
Model R R Square R Square Estimate Change Change df1 df2 Change
1 .642a 0.412 0.356 2.87653 0.412 7.346 2 21 0.004
a. Predictors: (Constant), years doing extension, years in service

C. Construct of Extension Patella [34] asserted that effective extension activities

tend to improve the standard of living of the people.
a. Nature of Extension Likewise, Fernan[35] argued that there is a chance to
Garnering 3.35, university faculty members improve their quality of life once these people are
perceived that university extension is Service. This empowered and technology is diffused in the
means that there is irregular extension. The program community. Thus, effective extension programs aid in
of extension service is seen as a limited involvement achieving desired social change through making
of the school, only when a need occurs, e.g. when people participate in utilizing fully their own
calamities struck.Based on the typology of different resources and in solving problems relevant to
kinds of university engagement activity of [32] and changing social conditions [24].
[33], service makes university assets and services In addition, Ponniah, [36] claimed that extension
open; encourages hard-to-reach groups to use assets; services must be judged against their proper goals,
makes an intellectual contribution as “expert”; and that is, extension which is not in touch with and does
contributes to the civic life of the region. However, not significantly contribute to improving the life
[21] refuted the common notion that any community situation of its clientele, has lost its legitimization.
service done by the staff of a college or university is Extension, therefore, is a decision-oriented discipline.
academic extension. Thus, this thinking is seriously It is the verbalization of the HEI’s guarantee to bring
flawed, and must be corrected. about progress and transformation in the dismal
conditions of their extension stakeholders, for them to
Table 12. Nature of Extension profit from the promises of fair living standards [20].
Nature of Extension Weighted Mean
Ivory Tower 2.44 Table 13. Purpose of Extension
Non-Partisan 3.56 Purpose of Extension Weighted Mean
Service 3.00 Informative 3.88
Outreach 4.04 Persuasive 3.80
Engaged 3.72 Formative 3.88
Average WM 3.35 Emancipatory 3.80
Average WM 3.84
b. Purpose of Extension
Obtaining 3.84, respondents perceived that c. Level of Engagement
university extension is Formative. This means that the With a score of 3.72, respondents agree that their
purpose of extension is to enhance capabilities of university extension is already engaged as shown in
people to solve problems.Similarly, Guevarra& Table 14. Respondents perceived that their extension
7
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

activities are responsive, respecting partners, is supported by Berrio [25] and Lero [20]
academically neutral, accessible, integrated, and saying that financial insufficiency is the most
coordinated, except for resource partnership. serious constraint or problem for university
extension. Yet, financial capability tends to be
Table 14. Level of Engagement insignificant with the implementation of the
Seven- Part Test of Engagement WM program outputs [31].
Responsiveness 3.83 Respondents were asked to define extension
Respect for partners 3.85 based on their own understanding and
Academic Neutrality 3.80 involvement of university extension. Their
Accessibility 3.61 responses were analyzed using Wordle
Integration 3.87 application (Figure 2). Based on the result, the
Coordination 3.84
most common term used is community,
Resource Partnership 3.22
Average Weighted Mean 3.72 followed by development, help, function,
HEI/institution, and social and needs.
As Davidson [37] observed, extension’s new Therefore, the construct of extension is
challenge is to make extension more inclusive and perceived as HEI/institution’s function to help
responsive to the needs, integrating individual the social needs and in the development of the
expectations with the wider socio-economic, political, community. This is in consonance with Lero
and geographical environment. Also, like community [20] that extension is a function that draws on
development, extension aims at awareness creation, the ideals of social responsibility and that
further development for peoples and community majority of HEIs did extension work in areas
building [38]. The conduct of HEI extension ought to with needs perceived and determined by the
produce some definite results which must ultimately school/institution, in areas asking for assistance
change people’s attitudes or behavior, or benefit from the school, in areas where the school is
society in other ways [39]. based. This is also explained by the lack of
However, they disagree that there is sufficient research and extension linkage within the
resources (budget) for extension activities. This university [30].

Figure 2. WORDLE result of respondents’ extension definition

8
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
 Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015 Part II
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Based on the obtained results, it is concluded that
most of the respondents were female contractual
faculty members who were 1-10 years in service, with
1-5 years in doing extension, having 0-5 extension
involvement. Gender, employment status, years in
service and years in doing extension were related to
the number of extension involvement which was
commonly gift-giving and coastal clean-up.
The nature of extension was service where
involvement only occurs when need arises, while the
purpose was formative in enhancing capabilities, yet
they agreed that university extension was already
engaged. In general, construct of extensionwas
perceived as HEIs’ function to help the social needs
and development of the community.
It is therefore recommended for universities to be
engaged, they must build up their capacity to deliver,
accept, and embed community engagement within the
core teaching and research activities; then, as
Benneworth, et al. [33] stated “engagement would be
the central of the university”. University extension
must be constantly monitored for success, and pro-
actively implemented [40]; be regularly evaluated to
ensure relevance and effectiveness [24].To do away
with community outreach and dole out programs,
HEIs must strengthen and widen network with various
governments and non-government organizations and
must enhance instruction-research-extension linkage
[20].It would also be better if participatory extension
be promoted to make extension programs
emancipatory and sustainable. As Zamora [41] put:
“It is through this manner that the academe’s duty of
ensuring efforts have significant impact or relevance
to society’s objective of alleviating poverty and equity
and respond to current needs and priorities of the
populace”.
REFERENCES
[1] Rivera, W. M. (1990). Future of Extension
Worldwide. Journal of Extension. Volume 28,
Number 3.
http://www.joe.org/joe/1990fall/fut1.html.
[2] Baker, H. R. (1984). A Proposal for a Canadian
Study of Agricultural Transfer/Extension.
Unpublished report to the Canadian Agricultural
Research Council. Cited by Blackburn and Flaherty
(1994) in Extension Handbook: Processes and
Practices. Donald J. Blackburn. Editor. Toronto:
Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
[3] Goransson, Bo, RasiganMaharajh and Ulrich
Schmoch. (2009). New activities of universities in
9
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
transfer and extension: multiple requirements and
manifold solutions. Science and Public Policy, Vol.
36, Issue 2, pp. 157-164. DOI:
10.3152/030234209X406863
[4] Fay, I. G. (1962). Notes on Extension in Agriculture.
New York: Asia Publishing House.
[5] Roling, Niels. (1990). The Agricultural Research-
technology Transfer Interface: A Knowledge
Systems Perspective.
pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnabe269.pdf#page=15
[6] Kelsey, T. W. (2005). Economic and Community
Development: The Road Ahead. Extension
Directions. Pennsylvania Cooperative Extension
Newsletter.
[7] Schumaker, A., B. J. Reed and S. Woods. (2000).
Collaborative Models for Metropolitan University
Outreach: The Omaha Experience. Cityscape: A
Journal of Policy Development and Research.
Volume 5, Number 1.
[8] Aniedi, ArchibongIjeoma and David OtuEffiom.
(2011). Research Mandate of the University: An
Assessment of Junior Academic Staff Participation.
Journal of Education and Sociology, ISSN: 2078-
032X, Vol. 4. No.2.
[9] Magrath, C. P. (1999). Engagement and the twenty-
first century university. Journal of Public Service &
Outreach, Vol. 4, pp. 3–7
[10] Boyer, E. L.(1990). Scholarship reconsidered:
Priorities of the professorship. Princeton, NJ:
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching.
[11] Scott, John C. (2006). The Mission of the
University: Medieval to Postmodernism
Transformations. Journal of Higher Education. Vol.
77, 1. Ohio State University Press.
[12] Preece, Julia. (2010). Implementing the Third
Mission of Universities in Africa. National
University of Lesotho. A project funded by the
Association of African Universities MRCI Cycle 3
Grant
[13] Preece, J. (2011). Higher education and community
service: Developing the National University of
Lesotho’s third mission. Journal of Adult and
Continuing Education – Vol. 17, Number 1, Spring
issue, pp. 81-97.
[14] REPUBLIC ACT 8435. Agriculture and Fisheries
Modernization Act 1997. p39.
[15] Cardenas, V. R. (2005). Revitalizing the Philippine
Agricultural Extension System: Proposed Pluralistic
National Agricultural Extension policy and Program
Framework: Los Banos: SEAMEO-SEARCA.
[16] Velasco, L.R.I. and Zamora, O.B. (2000).
Environmentally friendly technologies for the
promotion of sustainable development: the role of
agricultural universities and colleges in Asia.
Presented in the Seminar-workshop with the same
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
title organized by the International Society for
Sustainable Agriculture in Asia, 27 October 2000,
Continuing Education Center, College, Laguna,
Philippines, and Bogor, Indonesia, November 2000.
[17] CHED Memorandum Order No. 08 S. 2008.
Guidelines for the CHED Outstanding Extension
Program Award. Commission on Higher Education.
DAP Bldg., San Miguel Ave., Ortigas Center, Pasig
City.
[18] CHED Memorandum Order No. 08 S. 2010. Revised
Guidelines for the Outstanding Higher Education
Institution (HEI) Extension Program Award.
Commission on Higher Education. HEDC Bldg.,
Garcia Ave., UP Campus, Diliman, Quezon City.
[19] RA 9045 (An act creating the Batangas State
University by integrating Jose P. Laurel Polytechnic
College in Malvar, Pablo Borbon Memorial Institute
of Technology and Apolinario R. Apasible School of
Fisheries in Nasugbu)
www.gov.ph/2001/03/22/republic-act-no-9045/
[20] Lero, Ruel, F. (2010). Deconstructing the Concept
and Operationalization of Extension as a Function of
Higher Education Institutions in the Philippines.
Laguna: UPLB. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
[21] Alcala, A. C. (2011). Research and Extension in the
Academe. DumagueteMetroPost. (downloaded on 9
Aug. 2012 from
http://dumaguetemetropost.com/research-extension-
in-academe-p1185-98.htm
[22] Mahlomaholo, S & T Matobako 2006. Service
Learning in South Africa Held Terminally Captive
by Legacies of the Past. Alternation, Vol.13,
Number 1, pp. 203 - 217.
[23] Chambers, Robert. (1994). The origins and practice
of participatory rural appraisal. World Development.
Vol. 22, Issue 7, pp. 953-969. DOI: 10.1016/0305-
750X(94)90141-4
[24] Quimbo, E. M. (2013). Extent of Extension Services
Delivery in Tertiary State Technological Institutions
of the Philippines. IAMURE Multidisciplinary
Research Journal, Vol. 6.
[25] Berrio, A. A. (2003). An Organizational Culture
Assessment Using the Competing Values
Framework: A Profile of Ohio State University
Extension.
http://www.joe.org/joe/2003april/a3.php/pmc/a4.php
[26] Radhakrishna, R. B. & Thomson, J. S. (1996).
Extension Agents’ Use of Information Sources.
Journal of Extension. Vol. 34, Number 1.
http://www.joe.org/joe/1996february/rb2.php
[27] Radhakrishna, R. & Martin, M. (1999). Program
Evaluation and Accountability Training Needs of
Extension Agents. Journal of Extension. 37(3),
http://www.joe.org/joe/1999june/rb1.php
10
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015
[28] Gaffikin, F. & Morrissey, M. (2008). A new synergy
for universities: Redefining academy as an “engaged
institution”. Education, Citizenship and Social
Justice, Vol. 3, No.1, pp. 97-116 DOI:
10.1177/1746197907086721
[29] Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and
Land-Grant Universities. (1999). Returning to our
Roots: The Engaged Institution. Third Report. US:
National Association of State Universities and Land-
Grant Colleges.
http://extension.psu.edu/Newsletters/ExtDirections_
Nov05.pdf
[30] Prakongsri, P. (1985) Operationalization and
Expectations of Agricultural Extension as a Function
of Universities in Thailand. Laguna: UPLB.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
[31] Tacbas, L. B., De Vera, M. & Romo, N. C. (2003).
The Effectiveness of the Extension Programs of the
University of Northern Philippines SY 2005-2008.
UNP Research Journal. Vol. 19, p.151-177.
[32] Benneworth, P.S., Charles, D.R., Conway, C.,
Hodgson, C. & Humphrey, L. (2009). How the
societal impact of universities can be improved both
conceptually and practically. In. Sharing Research
Agendas on Knowledge Systems: Final Research
Proceedings, Paris, France. http://goo.gl/eXDSVu
[33] Benneworth, P.S., Charles, D.R., Conway, C.,
Hodgson, C. & Humphrey, L. (2013). The
relationship of Community Engagement with
Universities’ Core Missions. In. University
Engagement with Socially Excluded Communities.
Springer. pp. 85-101
link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-
4875-0_5.
[34] Guevarra & Patella (2000). Effectiveness of the
community extension program of Filamer Christian
College as perceived by outreach clientele. Research
and educational training institute.
[35] Fernan, (2000)
[36] Ponniah, A., Dijkman, J., Hoekstra, D. & Workneh,
S. (n.d.). Past, Present and Future of Extension.
Canadian International Development Agency.
[37] Davidson, A.P. (2007). Participation, education, and
pluralism: towards a new extension ethic.
Development in Practice, 17: 1, 39 – 50.
[38] Swanepoel, H. & de Beer, F. (2006). Community
development: Breaking the cycle of poverty;
Lansdowne, Juta and Company, Ltd.
[39] Diem, K. G. (2004). Measuring Impact of
Educational Programs. Fact Sheet. New Jersey:
Rutgers Cooperative Research and Extension.
NJAES.
[40] Berrio, A. A., & Henderson, J. L. (1998). Assessing
customer orientation in public, non-profit
organizations: A profile of Ohio State University
 Mojares, The Construct of Extension from the University Faculty Perspective
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Extension. Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(4), Copyrights

11-17. Copyright of this article is retained by the author/s, with
[41] Zamora, Oscar B. (2009). Sustainable Agriculture first publication rights granted to APJMR. This is an open-
Education and Research at the University of the access article distributed under the terms and conditions of
Philippines Los Banos: Status, Challenges, and the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creative
Needs. Journal of Developments in Sustainable commons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Agriculture, Vol. 4, pp. 41-49.
https://goo.gl/VgwQRh

11
P-ISSN 2350-7756 | E-ISSN 2350-8442 | www.apjmr.com
Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No. 5, December 2015